Posted by stinenavy on 4/19/2013 11:37:00 PM (view original):So what's your take on you violating the 1000 mile rule listed on the fair play guidelines?

ill just come out and say it up front - my take is kind of a cop out, to be honest - in one regard - but i think there is also some validity to my defense here, so bear with me. its a combination of a couple things. first, for context, the fairplay guidelines are unclear and what they say and what they mean (evidenced by the response to certain issues) are often significantly out of whack. taking fair play guidelines as written, literally, often violates the spirit of the law, and often leads to conclusions which are not consistent with how CS views the issues (evidences by their actions). that perspective is important to my stance on this one.

secondly, the old rule was, "you couldnt have 2 teams in the same division, in the same geographic region". when the rule got changed, what i remember hearing about is that it was changed to be 1000 miles, to eliminate the subjectivity. when rules changed, i did reread the fairplay guideilnes, and that sounded reasonable to me. ive had SIUE and South Carolina together much longer than i considered the possibility that having two teams *in different divisions* within 1000 miles was not allowed. simply reading the rules, nothing was mentioned, and i didnt think of it - and ive never seen *anything* from CS that makes it clear that you cant have rules in different divisions.

so, having SIUE and south carolina, when some time ago (like 8 months maybe), there was a thread where someone questioned someone who had 2 teams, but they were in different divisions, 1000 miles apart. then, i realize the fair play guidelines JUST say 1000 miles apart, which generally, without specifying if same division or not, would suggest it doesnt matter, 1000 miles is the rule no matter what the division. however, i chose not to press the issue or get clarification, and thats the cop out. i probably should have but i honestly can say, i figured it was at least a 50/50 chance that seble meant to change the regional thing to 1000 miles and didnt intentionally change the divisional rule. however, given the thread from 2 days ago, im pretty sure he will respond "doesnt matter what division" if he is asked, right now. a year ago? i could very easily see it going either way. CS should make these rule changes clear, and they dont, and i didnt take it upon myself to clarify. i have not picked up teams in different divisions within 1000 miles since becoming aware it was possibly not allowed. ive had SIUE for 5 years, and ivr legally had a d1 team in d1 tark within 1000 miles of that school, for most of my d1 career. legally. i have no clue if CS meant to outlaw that or not, but i felt i had a reasonable cause to believe that the intention was really to change the "within the same region" part to 1000 miles. and i still have never seen teams moved for being within 1000 miles in different divisions - while ive seen a handful in the same division.

so, in summary, im not convinced im breaking the rules, even though i admit its kind of a cop out not to know and not to ask. i do think seble would say division doesnt matter today, but i think there are really good odds that was not his intention, and he would have said it has to be the same division, if asked when he changed the rule. furthermore, i think i had those 2 teams before the rule changed, and i dont recall seble asking the community to change teams on their own. when asked, he said he would make a coach move, immediately or at the end of the season, if brought up to him. this has always been a grey area and the longest standing rule - even when it WASNT the rule - was that you could do whatever you wanted with multiple teams as long as you didnt negatively impact everybody, AKA, as long as nobody complained. so this is not a black and white issue even if the rule is black and white, and its not, and i believe i had the teams before hand too, which is meaningful because when asked about existing coaches, seble has said he would enforce the rule if pressed (as opposed to saying, those coaches needed to immediately comply) - which to me suggests he really was not trying to make existing coaches move - rather, to have a solid defense when he moved a coach who did something that caused someone to complain about it.

i dont claim to be perfect, nor do i expect a different set of rules. posts in this thread suggesting the opposite are way off base. i dont actively use my teams to gain an advantage, and i actually go out of my way to avoid unintentional advantages, even hurting my own teams on multiple occasions, to make sure no coach got rubbed the wrong way. however, im not perfect, and this is supposed to be a for-fun game, where the game admins have consistently (over my career) made it clear they dont particualrly have a problem with multiple teams, and hate dealing with it, but have to do something when people complain. so, if they dont REALLY want me to switch my teams, and rules and intentions are vague and unclear, i dont really feel bad not doing it. the game is supposed to be fun and dropping SIUE or SC totally would ruin my fun. should i probably do anything in my power to set a good example, and have moved that team myself, following a request for clarification from seble (and assuming he said it was not allowed)? probably. but im not mother teresa here. im just trying to play the fricken game and have a little fun doing it.

Posted by stinenavy on 4/20/2013 12:33:00 AM (view original):Since you won't take the initiative I'll submit a ticket on your behalf.

I believe the fair play guidelines is clear on this issue.

its obvious to me you are just being a bad sport because you lost BOTH battles when you jumped the guys i was on with USC 2 seasons ago, with st louis, and then i poached you at 1500 miles this season. way to be classy!

If you look at my resume for Naismith and Tark, you can see how unsuccessfull I was when I first started playing this game a while back. After just losing year after year, I quit cause I wasn't getting the hang of it.

Fast forward to when I decided to play the game again, and you can see that I've become a pretty successful coach, although not elite by any level. The difference this time was that before getting a new team and starting over, I went through the forums and read as much as I could about how to be successful. The advice and tips from the veteran coaches was worth it's weight in gold, and since doing so I win far in excess of how often I lose (except at Big 6 schools, still can't figure that out).

The point I am making is that if coaches like billyg cared so much about winning that they would cheat at a game, why would they go out of their way to help other users get better at the game, thereby lessening their chances to win??? I would never have figured out pulldowns on my own, and that is a huge part of success in this game. And, even if the coaches that have multiple teams gain a slight inadvertant advantage, I feel that is minimal compared to what they and others have provided in the forums

And no, I am not condoning blatant cheating, but if that was billy's intention, he wouldn't have his alt id's be so similar. Would I prefer coaches not have 2 teams in the same world, I would, and I think most would, but is it a big enough issue to make many coaches give up many teams and turn the worlds into a bigger ghosttown, then no, it's clearly not worth it.

OK, again, my two cents as as admitted alisas-user, but respectful of the 1,000 mile limit, and no way for the two teams to help one another.
Much as it hurts, BIllyG, whose posts on how he does things provided a treasure trove of useful info, and who I think can win under any circumstance, should stop his inner dialogue about whether he is adhering to the rules by violating the 1,000 mile rule. He should give up one of his teams. No ifs, ands or buts. If he chooses to keep more than one team in the same world, fine, but more than 1,000 miles apart.

Far more pervasive than the opportunities to cheat through having more than one team in the same world is the real threat: collusion. It is epidemic. OK, would think if you are a low D1 school, it is not collusion to ask the Big Dogs in your area to give you some idea of who they wanted, so that you could stay away from those guys. An advantage? Yes, in that it keeps you from spending money chasing something you never would get, anyway. But if those Big Dogs decided between them how to split up the good recruits, that is collusion. And if they decided to get together and jump another Big Dog, that is collusion. And that happens an awful lot; would guess in some conferences, it is a way of life. I know several good, veteran coaches that have gotten so sick of the collision that they have quit the game, or dropped down to another division. That is the real danger to our game, not the isolated incidents of one coach using multiple aliases for the purposes of cheating.

One of the dumbest threads ever. You have coaches who have seen zero success in HD complaining about this '1000' mile rule. Like it is 'impossible' or something for a d-2 schools to naturally recruit nationally. Like it is THAT hard to have two schools 1000 miles apart and STILL buy FSS for the lesser team. Additionally a lot of points being made are 'play a 1-a-day before you pick up another team in that world', no. 1-a-day worlds are completely unappealing to many.

Posted by dwoelflin07 on 4/23/2013 1:26:00 PM (view original):One of the dumbest threads ever. You have coaches who have seen zero success in HD complaining about this '1000' mile rule. Like it is 'impossible' or something for a d-2 schools to naturally recruit nationally. Like it is THAT hard to have two schools 1000 miles apart and STILL buy FSS for the lesser team. Additionally a lot of points being made are 'play a 1-a-day before you pick up another team in that world', no. 1-a-day worlds are completely unappealing to many.

Dude, Billy, I think you're a neat dude. If SIUE and South Carolina are less than 1,000 miles apart you should give up South Carolina. The rules are clear. They are only not clear if you add words that aren't there.

If I can't have teams less than 1,000 miles apart, you shouldn't either.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 4/23/2013 1:28:00 PM (view original):Dude, Billy, I think you're a neat dude. If SIUE and South Carolina are less than 1,000 miles apart you should give up South Carolina. The rules are clear. They are only not clear if you add words that aren't there.

If I can't have teams less than 1,000 miles apart, you shouldn't either.

The rules HAVEN'T always been clear. Now people want to enforce them after CBG has put A LOT of time and money into his program? Seems pretty fair to me.

Unfortunately, the other thing is that the 1000 mile rule makes no sense-- it would make a lot more sense to say outside-720-miles (twice the 360-mile recruiting cost breaking point that so many users follow), or outside the same division, or just not at all. 1000 is utterly arbitrary, and no better than "outside the same region", which is the rule it replaced.

At outside the same region, or 720 miles, Billy is OK. but because 1000 is a nice round number, he's not?

Still don't see any # as an answer. You get 15K for a scholarship in div-1. Doesn't matter if you have a d1 team in hawaii and a d2 team in maine, you can still EASILY buy states for your d2 team. Mile radius is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.

Posted by tedlukacs on 4/23/2013 1:15:00 PM (view original):OK, again, my two cents as as admitted alisas-user, but respectful of the 1,000 mile limit, and no way for the two teams to help one another.
Much as it hurts, BIllyG, whose posts on how he does things provided a treasure trove of useful info, and who I think can win under any circumstance, should stop his inner dialogue about whether he is adhering to the rules by violating the 1,000 mile rule. He should give up one of his teams. No ifs, ands or buts. If he chooses to keep more than one team in the same world, fine, but more than 1,000 miles apart.

Far more pervasive than the opportunities to cheat through having more than one team in the same world is the real threat: collusion. It is epidemic. OK, would think if you are a low D1 school, it is not collusion to ask the Big Dogs in your area to give you some idea of who they wanted, so that you could stay away from those guys. An advantage? Yes, in that it keeps you from spending money chasing something you never would get, anyway. But if those Big Dogs decided between them how to split up the good recruits, that is collusion. And if they decided to get together and jump another Big Dog, that is collusion. And that happens an awful lot; would guess in some conferences, it is a way of life. I know several good, veteran coaches that have gotten so sick of the collision that they have quit the game, or dropped down to another division. That is the real danger to our game, not the isolated incidents of one coach using multiple aliases for the purposes of cheating.

this cross division rule has never been made clear before now, although i wondered from the fair play guidelines. but its not really relevant now, i have to drop one of those teams.

the thing thats stupid to me is this. never before did admin try to address teams in different divisions, and theres good reasoning behind that. two close teams going after the same recruits, there is an issue of unintentionally gaining an advantage. a+ d1 south carolina shares 0 potential recruits with d2 SIUE. i guess low d1 can compete with d2 and d2 with d3, but thats really the case with different coaches, more than the same coach (a high shooting coach with one team is rarely a low shooting coach with the other, where the overlap really comes into play). the preventing teams in different divisions thing, to me, is all about intentional cheating, and intentional cheaters can so easily not get caught, by hiding an alias, or using free HD. if i wanted to cheat, i can guarantee id never get caught. its so easy, even without having the computer background i have (which would allow me to prevent linking of my accounts programatically, which seble does not do, it seems - they only check if someone complains - and someone has to notice to complain - but its fairly easy to prevent being caught even if you do get a complaint, if that was your goal, and you understood computer networking). so it seems silly to me that admin would enforce cross-division limits designed to stop intentional cheating, when the only guys you will catch, at least 98% of the time, are the guys playing above board, who are transparent about their teams.

so, i really oppose the cross-division limit, its retarded to me. i was hoping admin didnt go that far, he never said he did, and i never saw it confirmed through enforcement or through a comment on the forums, or anything. but i suppose he did go that far. i guess to me i had plausible deniability, and given my level of respect for the rule, thats all i cared to have. i see what you are saying ted, following the rules for the sake of following the rules, it has merits. i generally follow the rules in life, never commit violent crimes or crimes of sexual nature. i do drive over the speed limit fairly regularly, however. ive broken some forest fire laws designed to prevent idiots from being idiots, and other similar laws i dont think are intended for people who have basic common sense. the reality is rules, like laws, are put out to protect people from doing wrong, and have to be over protective, for that reason. it doesnt mean there arent reasonable things you can do that are still against the law. until you infringe or potentially infringe upon the rights of another, i have little to no respect for rules and laws, who is the victim or potential victim? to me, this is one of those. the spirit of the rules have been clear for a long time, and so ive largely ignored the changes to the technical definitions of the rules, in HD. is that wrong? maybe, but i dont see it that way, especially when the technical definition is throw out by admin any time it does not meet the spirit of the rule, as he intended it.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 4/23/2013 1:28:00 PM (view original):Dude, Billy, I think you're a neat dude. If SIUE and South Carolina are less than 1,000 miles apart you should give up South Carolina. The rules are clear. They are only not clear if you add words that aren't there.

If I can't have teams less than 1,000 miles apart, you shouldn't either.

it would be one thing if seble explained the intention of the rules, and wrote rules that matched his enforcement. but neither of those is even remotely close to true. to say the rules are clear is nonsense, i think that is abundantly clear if you follow seble's enforcement of the rules. collusion has been defined as an agreement between two people, by HD, while collusion warnings and enforcements have been dished out time and time again (more times than not), WITHOUT an explicit agreement between two users.